Month: October 2023

Halloween isn’t as frightening as it used to be. How can traditional monsters compare to Hamas’ actions in killing infants, China’s growing nuclear arsenal, progressive antisemitism rising to Hitlerian levels, Putin’s atrocities in Ukraine, crime rampaging through American cities?

In 2023, you have to feel sorry for our old friends Dracula, assorted mummies and the Creature from the Black Lagoon.   Don’t let us forget all those witches, either.  Try as they might, they simply can’t conjure up the terror they used to.

After all, those devilish monsters could barely harass a handful of folks on any particular evening.  Some of those goblins and ghouls were restricted to just All Hallows Eve.  What horror could a nibble on the neck from a hungry vampire produce when Hamas is beheading folks on a mass scale every day?

How do you compare the frightening capabilities a misunderstood creature of the night can have to, say, the thought of a terrorist heading in your direction? Or even something as tiny as a China-made COVID germ?

What is really scary, though, isn’t some raging enemy or even a toxic malady.  What is most frightening is the growing inability or unwillingness of our leaders to deal these threats.  Americans used to be a “can do” people.  If something stood in our way, we cut a path through it.  If someone opposed us, we flattened them.  Now we passively tolerate true evil.

Not unlike the insidious infestation of celluloid horror movie terrors in a Hollywood script, we have allowed the very fabric of the American nation to be undermined.  A little over a decade ago, it would have been unimaginable that the First Amendment would have been so seriously disregarded by bureaucrats claiming they had the right to censor the media. A mere decade ago, who would have believed that parents objecting to the rape of their young daughters on school grounds would be labelled as domestic terrorists?

We have had a black president, black supreme court justices, black mayors, governors, senators and congressional representatives. There are laws on the books banning discrimination. We are now led, however, by an administration and media that appears determined to rekindle former hatreds by falsely portraying our society as racist.

Those same hate-mongers eagerly seek to divide the nation along political lines, and utilize the Department of Justice to persecute those who disagree with the current regime. Just as Dracula recoiled from crucifixes, our Justice Department disdains traditional Catholics. 

Who would have believed that neo-Nazi’s on college campuses and on the streets of cities would vigorously support the beheading of Jewish children, the raping of Israeli women, and wholesale slaughter of civilians? Even Hitler attempted to hide his mass murders. Hamas films their actions. Despite that, some of the same publications that ignored the Holocaust are now downplaying those actions.

No one would have believed that any presidential administration would ignore border controls, and allow millions, including military age men, foreign agents, cartel criminals and human traffickers to cross into the United States.

Dr. Frankenstein created his woefully misunderstood reanimated man, but the product of our educational system is far worse.  By replacing facts with propaganda and ignoring or misrepresenting the lessons of history, American educators have developed a generation devoid of an accurate historical perspective and with a contempt for the concept of individual rights and personal responsibility. The manifestation of their creation isn’t a single creature, but a large portion of an entire age group who cannot tolerate opinions other than their own.

This Halloween, the terrors of the creatures of the night are a welcome distraction from the horrors that exist in the real world.

Illustration: Pixabay

The media is scrupulously ignoring how bad the American economy currently is, and the dangerous cliff it is heading towards.

Consider the following quick overview. The federal government has amassed a massive debt of approximately $33 Trillion dollars, significantly higher than the entire U.S. GDP of about $23 trillion.  The Congressional Budget office reports that there was a $1.4 trillion deficit in the first nine months of FY2023 Under Biden’s Watch.  As of July 2023 it costs $726 billion to service the debt, which is 14% of the total federal spending. 

It’s not just Washington. Cities and states are reeling under the increased fiscal burden of feeding, housing, medicating and educating the vast numbers of illegal aliens pouring into their jurisdictions.

American households carry a total of $17.1 trillion in debt as of the second quarter of 2023, and the average household debt is $101,915 as of the end of 2022, according to The Ascent financial web site. . Unfortunately, that doesn’t just represent “good” debt, such as mortgage costs. Annutiy.org reports that “Recently, credit card debt has reached record heights. Since the end of 2021, Americans’ credit card debt has increased by $130 billion. That 15% increase is the largest jump in over 20 years. Many experts believe that recent high interest rates have made it much harder for Americans to pay off their existing credit card debt.”  It’s the first time credit card debt has risen that high.

The New York Federal Reserve found  that “Total household debt rose by $16 billion to reach $17.06 trillion in the second quarter of 2023, according to the latest Quarterly Report on Household Debt and Credit. Credit card balances saw brisk growth, rising by $45 billion to a series high of $1.03 trillion. Other balances, which include retail credit cards and other consumer loans, and auto loans increased by $15 billion and $20 billion, respectively. “ The average credit card charges average an extraordinary 20.53% interest rate.

The prospects for families to address that debt are dwindling. Prices have risen dramatically since 2021, and inflation continues to grow. The Washington Examiner notes that

“Overall average prices have already increased by 16% since President Joe Biden took office, but the disproportionate growth in essentials, which comprise a greater share of budgets for lower-income households, has meant the least privileged have paid the highest burden. For example, the consumer price index specifically for food is up 19% since January 2021, and electricity prices are up 23%. In the last month alone, food and electricity prices increased by 0.2%. Shelter prices, which increased by 0.3% last month and more than 7% over the past year, have also been a major driver of inflation’s resurgence.”

Supermarket News notes “that The average family in June spent about $973 at the supermarket, up 3.5% from last year. Use of apps that allow shoppers to finance payments surged 40% in the first two months of 2023.” When families must finance the basics of daily life, particularly when there is no relief in sight, that is a recipe for disaster.  Loans must eventually be paid. There is no indication that conditions are moving to a point were payment will be feasible.  This not the same as a house or car that can be repossessed. People will always have to eat.  

The House Budget Committee reports that real median household income declined last year, falling from $76,330 to $74,580 in 2022-dollar terms. To put this in perspective, we haven’t seen this level of decline since the Great Recession of 2008.

Specifically, the report finds: Real median earnings declined by 2.2 percent over the same period. Real median post-tax income was down 8.8 percent relative to 2021. The reason for this decline in real income was the result of 40-year high inflation. In other words, the cost of good and services, also known as the Consumer Price Index (CPI) rose 7.8 percent between 2021 and 2022, while income growth could not keep up. In short, Americans have seen a decline in real median income both of Biden’s first two years in office.

Frank Vernuccio serves as editor-in-chief of the New York Analysis of Policy and Government.

The balance of power is changing in the communist world with China emerging as the dominant power in the Sino-Russian bilateral relationship.

Beijing’s political influence is also expanding in the Russian Far East. It is employing “soft power” to increase economic opportunities inside Siberia while Putin is occupied with the war in Ukraine. China is repeating the pattern it followed in securing its interests in Central Asia. What is raising concern among Western China watchers recently is the type and effectiveness of the tools Beijing is using out of its Central Asian playbook. Some analysts suggest China is setting the stage to move from deploying soft power to hard in Russia’s Far East in the coming years.

Beijing’s reach is already beyond simple economic influence. Recently, China began deploying private security companies (PSCs) in the area as it has done elsewhere overseas. China is directing its investment efforts toward accommodating the major stakeholders in Siberia who control what companies can operate in their regions. The Russian publication Kommersant reports that the inflow of Chinese investment was complicated by economic sanctions last year.

To alleviate some of the challenges it posed, the Russian Ministry for the Development of the Far East announced plans to develop Advanced Special Economic Zones (ASEZs) to attract partners who can create manufacturing facilities in the Far Eastern regions along the Chinese border. The companies it is attracting are Chinese and well-funded. This area has over three times the level of investment of that in other parts of Russia.

Over the last year there was an increase of over 530 firms setting up operations and over 3,300 individual projects receiving state support.

China views its role as supportive of the regional elites and as a provider of funding opportunities that Moscow can no longer handle since the onset of its war in Ukraine. However, it is not all benign. “These means go to sponsoring ethnic unrest and then supporting elite crackdowns, even using outright corruption to win over government officials and business leaders,” according to Paul Goble of the Jamestown Foundation. East of the Ural Mountains, in particular, China is pushing to expand its influence inside the Russian Federation. Moscow has taken notice and it has generated concern inside the Kremlin and at the regional level in parts of the Far east. Xi Jinping recognizes that Vladimir Putin is busy with his war efforts in Ukraine and it presents him with a unique opportunity to make inroads with little resistance from the Kremlin.

China’s neo-imperialism, however, is not without its local critics who are resisting China’s increased activity. While some view the investments as purely economic and positive, many locals are growing concerned that China’s tactics include the formation of political alliances with regional elites that threaten their territorial integrity. Goble says that “Such fears limit the success of China’s soft power offensive at the mass level,” but remain less impactful with the regional elites.

Far Eastern leaders have “kowtowed” to Beijing for a long time. Large parts of the region once belonged to China. The population is ethnically Chinese and speaks Mandarin. Local Russian officials are growing in their deference to Beijing. Almost a year ago, the governor of Russia’s Amur Oblast ordered that schools on the Russian-Chinese border begin offering special “in-depth study of the Chinese language.”

These courses are now mandatory in the city of Blagoveshchensk, with the program expanding along the border schools in other cities. China’s influence is growing among the masses, too. Street signs in many areas are now in Chinese.

Putin’s summer visit with Xi Jinping was touted officially as a success, however, it was not as positive as portrayed by the participants. The Liaoning province meeting basically discussed what China was willing to provide Russia. It appears that Putin received little beyond the opportunity to meet. The deals signed boosted Chinese trade opportunities in Siberia and as far west as the Ural Mountains. The two leaders also agreed to open additional Chinese trade offices, that will effectively operate as “proto-embassies” and further expand Chinese influence. Russian media downplayed Putin’s trip, as it highlights a region now leaning toward Beijing and away from Moscow Center. Goble points out that bilateral agreements the leaders signed enable regional Russian authorities to work directly with Beijing, rather than through Moscow as normally required under Russian law.

Perhaps most telling about the bilateral relationship, is that after the conclusion of the meetings this summer, China issued new maps of its Indian and Russian border areas. They included territory previously not marked as Chinese. Moscow did not make a strong attempt to walk back the newly drawn borders, although a Foreign Ministry spokesperson said they did not reflect the reality. Aggressive

Chinese moves may portend further hard power incursions into Russia’s Far East and, perhaps, a window in future events should Beijing decide to reclaim the land it lost at the end of World War II.

Daria Novak served in the U.S. State Dept.

Photo: China Government site

The growth of the world’s population is expected to flatten out by the end of the century to a 0.1% annual increase. Some nation-states are feeling the impact of lower birth rates earlier than others. One of those countries is Russia. According to a PEW Research Center report, the global fertility rate in 2100 with be 1.9%, representing a dramatic drop from the current numbers. Russia’s war in Ukraine has exacerbated the problem for Moscow. The country’s economy is drained by the twin challenges of military and economic losses and now faces harsh structural challenges, according to Sergey Sukhankin of the Jamestown Foundation. One of the greatest immediate tasks for Vladimir Putin, is to find a way to develop a qualified workforce to help minimize the impact of Western sanctions.

Russia’s war in Ukraine depleted the country of able-bodied, working aged men. Battlefield losses are coupled with increased emigration by those seeking to avoid military service or serving on the front lines. Although Rosstat, Russia’s official statistical agency, has been suppressing the numbers lost in combat, those numbers are needed for military planning and are slowing being released. They are devastating to the future growth of the Russian economy. What is known today is that combat deaths, reported under the label “external sources,” now account for 40 percent of all “external causes” of 18-29 years old Russian men and represent a significant, long-term, structural challenge to the regime.

To help alleviate the labor problems resulting from the war and Western sanctions, Putin turned to integrating prison labor in some sectors of the domestic economy. “Moscow has tried to veil these efforts by silencing experts and activists who have been vocal about the re-emergence of prison labor in the economy,” according to Sukhankin. Russia faced labor shortages in the past. In 2013, Oleksandr Podrabinek, of Imrussia.org, reported that human rights advocates were concerned about how the country was addressing serious shortages of manpower. “Strictly speaking, this problem has never disappeared, but public attention is drawn to it only from time to time. And this is understandable,” Podrabinek says, as “it is difficult to live with the constant understanding that voluntarily or involuntarily we use the fruits of salve labor.” Those in Russia’s slave labor camps typically suffer through 15-17 hour workdays, seven days a week in deplorable conditions, to supply the country with a wide variety of products. 

Vedomosti.ru reports that that the Russian Federal Penitentiary Service (FSIN) argued in favor of dramatically increasing the “use of prison labor in areas where there is a visible lack of foreign migrants.” The Russian Ministry of Justice added to it by suggesting that an increased reliance on prison labor could support strategic infrastructure projects in the Artic and Siberia. Sukhankin points out that Russian officials proposed using convicts for work along the Baikal-Amur Magistral (BAM) 2,687-mile-long railway, which is an alternative to the Trans-Siberian line. Several major Russian corporations, including Rosatom, Rostec, Rosano, and Roscosmos, are believed to be behind the initiative and will benefit from cheap and easily accessible labor. In August 2022, Sukhankin says that the All-Russia Public Organization’s Business Russia began testing Russian businesses readiness to incorporate an increased number of prison laborers in the operation. He says that according to the project’s findings, as many as between 100,000-180,000 convicts may be forced into harsh prison labor conditions in construction, agriculture, forestry, mining and clothing manufacturing. 

Arkady Gostev, head of FSIN, and Boris Titov, Russia’s presidential commissioner for entrepreneurs’ rights have actively lobbied Sergey Chemezov, head of Rostec with Titov claiming the convicts are “a discipline workforce” that could help Russia’s labor shortage. In 2022, approximately 9,300 prisoners were employed by Russian firms. By August 2023 that number has risen to 26,000 convicts. There is concern from abroad that the Kremlin is not accurately portraying how labor is used. Dw.com/ru in March reported that they may be involved in the production of weapons and military equipment. Earlier this year, British intelligence supported the DW report and indicated that it was an ongoing practice since August 2022. The reinstated Gulag style system appears reminiscent of the days of the Soviet economy, where it acted as the “manager” of the prison workforce on behalf of the state.

Daria Novak served in the U.S. State Dept.

Illustration: Pixabay

In one of the Kremlin’s more bizarre comments, Nikolay Korchunov, Russia’s ambassador at large, complained to the semi-official news source RT about alleged NATO military expansion in the Arctic, a region where Russian forces dwarf those of the western alliance. He warned that “a set of necessary measures, including preventive ones,” would be take

 Vladimir Putin recently named the development of the Arctic as the country’s strategic priority. Last year, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said that Russia posed a strategic challenge to the alliance in the Arctic, calling for an expanded military footprint in the region.

According to the U.S. department of Defense, Russia has been expanding its military bases along its Arctic coastline and its Nagurskoye airfield on the Alexandra Land island in the Arctic. Russia has also been using its Arctic facilities to test new weapons, including the Poseidon 2M39 nuclear torpedo, a device launched from an Arctic-based vessel designed to create a tsunami along the eastern seaboard of the U.S. coastline.

In 2021, Air Force Gen. Glen D. VanHerck, during a hearing before the House Armed Services Committee, noted that  “We’re not able to have the persistence that I need to compete day-to-day in the Arctic.” Russia has 46 ice cutters, including seven that are nuclear powered, and 12 more are under construction. Although China isn’t an Arctic nation, they have two ice cutters and another under construction. The U.S. Coast Guard has a mere two ice cutters. Cleary, the U.S. Navy and the Coast Guard are overmatched by Russia’s naval and ice-based strength in the strategic region, a fact that produces extraordinary danger for both America and Canada.

VanHerck said Russia has reopened and strengthened Cold War military installations that were once shuttered. “They absolutely have a vested interest in the Arctic, and they also want to ensure that it’s secure for their efforts…” he notes.

The challenge has been building for several years. In 2018,  Rose Gottemoeller noted that “NATO must be more active in the area… there are real military challenges developing to which the NATO alliance has not paid sufficient attention for many, many years and we need to up our game…”

Several years ago, the U.S. Naval Institute quoted Coast Guard Commandant Admiral Paul Zuknft’s statement in support of new icebreakers:“If you do not have presence to exert sovereignty, you’re a paper lion.”

A RAND study stated that “Russia’s recent military activity in the Arctic raises questions for the United States as to what types of Arctic military capabilities it needs as part of an overarching strategy to ensure credibility at the negotiating table and an ability to deal with crises.

In July, Homeland Security Subcommittee on Transportation and Maritime Security Chairman Carlos Gimenez (R-FL) stressed that  “For the last decade, Russia has been building up its military capabilities in the Arctic, including its fleet of heavy icebreakers. …Additionally, the People’s Republic of China, despite having no sovereign territory within the Arctic region, is attempting to stake out interests in Arctic affairs. In 2018, the CCP declared the PRC to be a so-called “Near Arctic Nation.” The CCP and state-owned entities own and operate icebreakers and other polar capable ships, and during the last decade, these entities showed an increased willingness to transit their vessels through Arctic waters.”

Giminez warned “The United States cannot afford to ignore this increased interest in the Arctic from near-peer competitors. I am concerned that the delays the Coast Guard is experiencing with the development and deployment of the new Polar Security Cutters will negatively impact the Coast Guard’s ability to carry out its diverse mission set and protect the homeland in the Arctic.

Photo: The northern lights glow behind a Patriot launcher during Exercise Arctic Edge 2022 at Eielson Air Force Base, Alaska, March 5, 2022. The equipment—assigned to 5th Battalion, 52nd Air Defense Artillery Regiment—was integrated during the exercise for simulated air and missile defense in austere arctic environments (DOD)

Iran’s leaders continue to pledge “Death to America,” and are working diligently to develop a nuclear arsenal.  They have killed U.S. citizens, and have fired on American ships. They fund terrorism throughout the globe. 

Why does President Biden, as did his predecessor Barack Obama, assist, appease, and finance this dangerous rogue nation?

Sources indicate that Iran managed to deeply influence sources close to both Obama and Biden. There are concerns both within the State Department and the Department of Defense.

The Clarion Project reports that Robert Malley, the now-suspended Iran envoy in the Biden administration, is alleged to have funded, supported, and directed an Iranian intelligence operation designed to influence the U.S. and allied governments, according to leaked Iranian government emails.

The emails also reveal that Malley helped infiltrate Ariane Tabatabai, an Iranian agent of influence, into sensitive positions in the U.S. government, first at the State Department and then at the Pentagon. In a letter to defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, Rep. Mike Rogers (R-AL) states “I write … to express my deep concern with the Department’s hiring of Ariane Tabatabai as the Chief of Staff for Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low Intensity Conflict (ASD/SOLIC). Ms. Tabatabai’s past employment history and close ties to the Iranian regime are alarming and should be disqualifying for anyone seeking such a sensitive position of trust within the United States Department of Defense…The office of ASD SO/LIC oversees many of the Department’s most sensitive operations and programs, to include those to counter Iran’s malign activities throughout the world. It is the adamant position of the House Armed Services Committee that no person who aligns themselves with an adversary such as Iran, or who acts as a foreign agent of influence, wittingly or unwittingly, should wield any such influence over United States policy, or have access to such sensitive information.”

 According to American Military News, “Iran is reported to have established a network of influential researchers and academics throughout the United States and Europe. “…the Iran Experts Initiative, …is believed to have provided diplomats working for Iranian president Hassan Rouhani with access to influential policy circles during former President Barack Obama’s administration, [In which Biden served as Vice President and key advisor for the Middle East] used the Institute for Political and International Studies think tank to promote positive messages surrounding discussions of a nuclear between Iran and the United States.”

Rep. Rogers, who serves as Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, emphasizes that “The Iranian regime poses one of the greatest threats to U.S. national security. Iran is the largest state sponsor of terrorism, their proxies have killed Americans, and they are actively trying to assassinate multiple former U.S. officials.” 

A Gatestone study found that “The regime is now finally at the threshold of making all the nuclear weapons it desires, along with missiles to launch them at their enemies in the Middle East, Europe and America…The Biden administration has totally failed to curb Iran’s nuclear program – but then again evidence shows it had never intended to. The ‘sunset clause’ in then President Barack Obama’s 2015 JCPOA ‘nuclear deal’assured Iran’s rulers that in a few years, they could legitimately have as many nuclear weapons as they desired…”

It is believed that in return for a deal containing all the same flaws as the JCPOA agreement, which allowes Iran to build ta nuclear arsenal after a number of years, Biden would unfreeze $20 billion for the mullahs.

Senator Blackburn (R-Tenn,) notes that “Iran, which has declared its desire to destroy the U.S. and Israel, poses a greater threat every day. Tehran has reportedly amassed enough uranium for five nuclear weapons. Moreover, Iran has largely blocked the International Atomic Energy Agency from investigating undeclared nuclear material found in the country in 2019 and refused to let the agency install more cameras in its facilities. Instead of putting enormous pressure on the regime, Biden is offering Iran a sweetheart…”

The failure of Biden’s appeasement approach is clear. In addition to the fast-paced program to produce nuclear weapons, Iran has been instrumental in the stunningly brutal Hamas attack on Israel.  According to the Daily Mail, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards devised land, air and sea assault that has left the Middle East on the brink of all-out war.

Photo: Pixabay

If Judge Chutkan thinks the January 6 riot was an attempt to overthrown the government of the United States, who does she believe is responsible for that day’s events?

According to the Fairfield Sun Times, “(a) review of thousands of pages of hearing transcripts reveal that Chutkan has repeatedly expressed strong and settled opinions about the issues at the heart of United States v. Donald Trump – the criminal case she is now presiding over. These include her public assertions…that the Jan. 6 protests were orchestrated by Trump, and that the former president is guilty of crimes. She has described Jan. 6 as a ‘mob attack’ on ‘the very foundation of our democracy’ and branded the issue at the heart of the case she is hearing – Trump’s claim that the 2020 election was stolen – a conspiracy theory.”  

Further, “(b)efore sentencing Christine Priola, a Trump supporter from Ohio who pleaded guilty to obstruction of an official proceeding, to 15 months in jail, Chutkan appeared to lament the fact Trump was not yet in prison. ‘[The] people who mobbed that Capitol were there in fealty, in loyalty, to one man – not to the Constitution, of which most of the people who come before me seem woefully ignorant, not to the ideals of this country, and not to the principles of democracy,’ Chutkan said on Oct. 28, 2022. ‘It’s a blind loyalty to one person who, by the way, remains free to this day.’ (Emphasis added.)”

 In the case of Matthew Mazzocco, “another Jan. 6 defendant, (Chutkan rejected) Mazzocco’s argument that he traveled from Texas to Washington to engage in a legal political demonstration (and) declared at his October 2021 sentencing hearing: ‘He went there to support one man who he viewed had the election taken from him. In total disregard of a lawfully conducted election, he went to the Capitol in support of one man, not in support of our country or in support of democracy.’   Although Mazzocco only spent 12 minutes inside the Capitol and committed no violence, Chutkan rejected the government’s recommendation of three months home confinement for pleading guilty to “parading” in the Capitol, a Class B misdemeanor, and instead sentenced Mazzocco to 45 days in jail.”

In other words, the Judge who has publicly stated that “one man” disregarded “a lawfully conducted election” and that this “one man” is responsible for “an attack on the very foundation of our democracy,” who also calls the January 6 riot “an attempt to overthrow the government” is now the Judge assigned to hear charges brought against that one man, arising out of the events of January 6 – Donald J. Trump.

Obviously, the former President’s lawyers also know that a judge “who’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned,” should recuse themselves from hearing that case.  In that regard, a motion was made before Judge Chutkan, asking that these charges be heard by another judge.  Her response?

 “U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan said…she won’t recuse herself from Donald Trump’s 2020 election interference case in Washington, rejecting the former president’s claims that her past comments raise doubts about whether she can be fair… In seeking Chutkan’s recusal, defense lawyers cited statements she had made in two sentencing hearings of participants in the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol in which they said she had appeared to suggest that Trump deserved to be prosecuted and held accountable. They said the comments suggested a bias against him that could taint the proceedings. But Chutkan vigorously objected to those characterizations of her comments. ‘It bears noting that the court has never taken the position the defense ascribes to it: that former “President Trump should be prosecuted and imprisoned,’’ Chutkan wrote. ‘And the defense does not cite any instance of the court ever uttering those words or anything similar.’” 

Yes, you read that right.  In the past, Judge Chutkan has stated that one man, who remains free, is responsible for the January 6th “attempt to overthrow the government,” based on that one man’s refusal to accept the results of a “lawfully conducted” election.  But because she never actually identified that one man by name, she believes she can be fair.

Even while she has imposed harsher sentences than most of her judicial brethren on the people she believes followed that one man.

Maybe Judge Chutkan believes this nonsense.  Maybe she can compartmentalize her views from the evidence she hears, and maybe she can give Donald Trump a fair trial.

Maybe.

But what this judge has forgotten, is that the obligation to be fair and impartial is only part of a Court’s obligation.  A judge is also required to avoid the appearance of partiality.  According to Cannon 2 of the Code of Conduct for United States Judges, “(a) Judge Should Avoid Impropriety and the Appearance of Impropriety in all Activities…(a)n appearance of impropriety occurs when reasonable minds, with knowledge of all the relevant circumstances disclosed by a reasonable inquiry, would conclude that the judge’s honesty, integrity, impartiality, temperament, or fitness to serve as a judge is impaired.” 

In practice, the requirement to avoid the appearance of unfairness and bias is stronger than the necessity to avoid actual partiality and prejudice.  “A federal district judge who spoke to a newspaper to clarify procedural matters should have recused herself from the case because her comments could have been interpreted to indicate that she was biased, even though the judge in no way abdicated her ethical responsibilities by speaking, the U.S. Court of Appeals in Boston (1st Cir.) ruled on Feb. 5 (2001)…the court found that (the judge) should have recused herself because a reader might interpret her comments as evidence of bias. Even though she did not violate judicial ethics, the court said just a perception of bias was sufficient for recusal.”

Judge Chutkan has made a series of statements in a number of cases where she has handed out tough sentences to January 6th Defendants, laying the blame for their conduct on the one man who now stands before her seeking a fair and impartial hearing.  Even if she can separate her personal animosity from her obligation to hear the case with an unbiased ear, who truly believes she will actually give Donald Trump a fair trial?

Judge John Wilson (ret.) served on the bench in NYC

Illustration: Pixabay